These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3060600)

  • 1. Considerations for adhesion of impression materials to impression trays.
    Bomberg TJ; Goldfogel MH; Hoffman W; Bomberg SE
    J Prosthet Dent; 1988 Dec; 60(6):681-4. PubMed ID: 3060600
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Adhesive bond between elastomers and impression trays].
    Wirz J; Schmidli F
    Quintessenz; 1989 Jan; 40(1):131-8. PubMed ID: 2695964
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Adhesion of elastomeric impression materials to the impression tray].
    Viohl J; Nolte T
    Dtsch Zahnarztl Z; 1983 Jan; 38(1):13-7. PubMed ID: 6337815
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The influence of impression trays on the accuracy of stone casts poured from irreversible hydrocolloid impressions.
    Mendez AJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 1985 Sep; 54(3):383-8. PubMed ID: 3906093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The effect of tray selection, viscosity of impression material, and sequence of pour on the accuracy of dies made from dual-arch impressions.
    Ceyhan JA; Johnson GH; Lepe X
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Aug; 90(2):143-9. PubMed ID: 12886207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Dimensional accuracy of dental casts: influence of tray material, impression material, and time.
    Thongthammachat S; Moore BK; Barco MT; Hovijitra S; Brown DT; Andres CJ
    J Prosthodont; 2002 Jun; 11(2):98-108. PubMed ID: 12087547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Bond strength of two nonaqueous elastomeric impression materials bonded to two thermoplastic resin tray materials.
    Payne JA; Pereira BP
    J Prosthet Dent; 1995 Dec; 74(6):563-8. PubMed ID: 8778378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Dimensional accuracy of 2-stage putty-wash impressions: influence of impression trays and viscosity.
    Balkenhol M; Ferger P; Wöstmann B
    Int J Prosthodont; 2007; 20(6):573-5. PubMed ID: 18069363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Accurate dies and well-fitting crowns using three-in-one, all-plastic impression trays.
    Gottlieb M
    Dent Econ; 1996 Jan; 86(1):102-3. PubMed ID: 8612944
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Accuracy of complete dental arch impressions and stone casts using a three-dimensional measurement system. Effects on accuracy of rubber impression materials and trays.
    Ishida K
    Dent Jpn (Tokyo); 1990; 27(1):73-9. PubMed ID: 2099294
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Efficacy of tray adhesives for the adhesion of elastomer rubber impression materials to impression modeling plastics for border molding.
    Nishigawa G; Sato T; Suenaga K; Minagi S
    J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Feb; 79(2):140-4. PubMed ID: 9513098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The effect of impression volume and double-arch trays on the registration of maximum intercuspation.
    Hahn SM; Millstein PL; Kinnunen TH; Wright RF
    J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Dec; 102(6):362-7. PubMed ID: 19961994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Individualized erlanger KS-impression trays for infants with cleft lip and palate.
    Strobel-Schwarthoff K; Hirschfelder U; Hofmann E
    Cleft Palate Craniofac J; 2012 Mar; 49(2):237-9. PubMed ID: 21269046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Technical development of a silicone impression method. Application of copper-bonded individualized trays].
    Takesue H
    Shikai Tenbo; 1984 Jul; 64(1):61-74. PubMed ID: 6390749
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Dimensional stability of elastomeric impression materials in custom-made and stock trays.
    Valderhaug J; Fløystrand F
    J Prosthet Dent; 1984 Oct; 52(4):514-7. PubMed ID: 6389833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Study of the interocclusal distortion in impressions taken with different types of closed-mouth trays and two types of impression materials.
    Mañes-Ferrer JF; Selva-Otaolaurruchi EJ; Parra-Arenós C; Selfa-Bas I
    Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal; 2010 Jan; 15(1):e79-84. PubMed ID: 19680183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Accuracy of open tray implant impressions: an in vitro comparison of stock versus custom trays.
    Burns J; Palmer R; Howe L; Wilson R
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Mar; 89(3):250-5. PubMed ID: 12644799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Technique for making flexible impression trays for the microstomic patient.
    Whitsitt JA; Battle LW
    J Prosthet Dent; 1984 Oct; 52(4):608-9. PubMed ID: 6389845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A comparative study of inter-abutment distance of dies made from full arch dual-arch impression trays with those made from full arch stock trays: an in vitro study.
    Reddy JM; Prashanti E; Kumar GV; Suresh Sajjan MC; Mathew X
    Indian J Dent Res; 2009; 20(4):412-7. PubMed ID: 20139562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Impression success using the dual arch technique.
    Small BW
    Gen Dent; 2005; 53(6):396-7. PubMed ID: 16366044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.